Competition Journals: Jan. - March 2013

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article.

1. General - Scope of application

How Antitrust Lost Its Goal, B. ORBACH (Fordham Law Review, Vol. 81, 2013)

In the 70 years since the enactment of the Sherman Act, competition has been the undisputed goal of competition law. The introduction of the consumer welfare test led to the dissipation of competition as an objective of the U.S. competition rules. This article explores how antitrust lost its "competition" objective and argues for its restoration. First, while "consumer welfare" was proposed as a solution to reconcile internal contradictions in competition law, the adoption of the consumer welfare test has generated a long-lasting debate, leading to confusion and doctrinal uncertainty. Second, the small business interests hypothesis, often put forward to explain the enactment of the Sherman Act, is inconsistent with sound historical study. Third, the logic behind Robert Bork’s consumer welfare thesis requires the restoration of the "competition" objective.

New challenges for 21st century competition authorities, N. PETIT (www.chillingcompetition.com)

This article identifies, on the basis of a statistical review of articles published in five leading competition law journals since January 2011, the current challenges for competition authorities. It is based on the assumption that the topics that statistically attract the most attention from competition law specialists are the most likely to constitute the challenges for competition authorities. The author has discarded certain topics that are regularly discussed (such as the internationalization of international competition law) in order to focus on less common issues. For the sake of clarity, the article distinguishes, on the one hand, the challenges of competition law enforcement (giving general guidance through authorization decisions and not through negative decisions, avoiding the "settle them all" approach, effectively enforcing competition law in markets where technology changes rapidly, ensuring optimal detection and compensation in cartel cases, The main issues are those related to the compliance programme (finding the right position on the compliance programme) and those related to substantive issues (identifying the real objectives of competition law, maintaining the role of the economy in competition law enforcement, opening up competition law to interdisciplinary points of view, deciding on the future of market definition, moving towards efficiency gains).

Is competition law adapted to the crisis? A ROUND TABLE DISCUSSION WITH E. BARBIER de LA SERRE, D. GERARD, O. D’ORMESSON and P. SPILLIAERT (Cah. dr. entr., Jan-Feb. 2013, n° 1, p. 9)

Nouveau regard sur le régime contentieux des avis de l’Autorité de la concurrence, P. WILHELM et D. PRICE (Contracts, conc., consum. Jan. 2013, Study 1)

Agriculture and competition (Proceedings of the competition workshop - Bercy, 26 Sept. 2011), (Competition & consumption, n° 171-172, Jan-June 2011)

Competition" section of the law on overseas economic regulation, M. COMERT (BRDA 23/12, 15 Dec. 2012, No. 22, p. 12)

Authorisation of the online sale of medicines, A. LAUDE (D. 28 Feb. 2013, point of view, n° 8, p. 516)

Activity of European Union courts in competition law (Sept.-Nov. 2012), P. ARHEL (Petites affiches, 24 Dec. 2012, No 256, p. 4; Petites affiches, 26 Dec. 2012, No 258, p. 15; Petites affiches, 11 March 2013, No 50, p. 5; Petites affiches, 12 March 2013, No 51, p. 4)

Activity of the Cour de cassation and the Conseil d’État in competition law (October-December 2012), P. ARHEL (Petites affiches, 22 Feb. 2012, n° 39, p. 4)

European Competition Law - Anticompetitive Practices (1 April 2012 - 30 September 2012) , J.-B. BLAISE and L. IDOT (RTD eur. Oct.-Dec. 2012, No 4, p. 907)

Chronique Concurrence, E. CLAUDEL (RTD com., 2013, p. 736)

Chronique Concurrence,L. IDOT (Europe, Jan. 2013, comm. 32-39; Feb. 2013, comm. 87-93; March 2013, comm. 134-139)

Chronique Concurrence, D. BOSCO, G. DECOCQ and A. SEE (Contracts, conc., consum. Jan. 2013, comm. 11 to 15; Feb. 2013 comm. 37 to 41; Mar. 2013 comm. 59 to 64)

Chronique Concurrence-distribution, D. FERRIER (D. 21 March 2013, No. 11, panorama, p. 732)

Chronique de droit économique, C. MATHONNIERE (RLDA Dec. 2012, 77, n° 4364 to 4367, p. 38; Jan. 2013, 78, n° 4408 to 4415, p. 40; Feb. 2013, 79, n° 4455 to 4460, p. 37; Mar. 2013, 80, n° 4497 to 4501)

Competition Law Chronicle, L. IDOT and C. PRIETO (RDC 2012/4, Oct. 2012, p. 1225)

Chronique Droit de la concurrence, M. CHAGNY (Rev. jurispr. com., n° 4, July-August 2012, p. 12)

Chronique Droit de la concurrence, G. DECOCQ (Rev. jurispr. com., No. 5, Sept.-Oct 2012, p. 29)

Chronique Droit de la concurrence et de la distribution, P. LE MORE (Lexbase Hebdo, éd. affaires, n° 315, Nov. 8, 2012, p. 1; Lexbase Hebdo, éd. affaires, n° 322, Jan. 10, 2013, p. 1)

Chronique Concurrence, (RJDA, No. 1, Jan. 2013, p. 75; No. 2, Feb. 2013, p. 156; No. 3, March 2013, p. 236)

Should Competition Policy Promote Happiness? M. E. STUCKE (Fordham Law Review, forthcoming)

The Evolving Populisms of Antitrust, S. VAHEESAN (http://papers.ssrn.com)

Antitrust and the Political Center, A. LAMADRID(CPI Antitrust Chronicle January 2013 (2))

Ten Years of DG Competition Effort to Provide Guidance on the Application of Competition Rules to the Licensing of Standard-Essential Patents: Where Do We Stand? D. GÉRADIN (http://papers.ssrn.com )

Special Issue: Louis Kaplow’s Why (Ever) Define Markets? (The Antitrust Bulletin, 57, 4)

Merger policy, entry, and entrepreneurship, R. MASON AND H. WEEDS (European Economic Review, 57, pp. 23-38)

Why payment card fees are biased against retailers, J. WRIGHT (RAND Journal of Economics, 43, 4, pp. 761-780)

2. Agreements

2.1. General

Concrete Shoes for Competition: the Effect of the German Cement Cartel on Market Price, K. HÜSCHELRATH, K. MÜLLER and T. VEITH (Journal of Competition Law and Economics, 9, 1, pp. 97-123)

This article applies to a specific case the standard techniques for measuring the cartel surcharge.

Expedia" judgment: the application of de minimis thresholds by national competition authorities, A. FROMONT (JDE, No 195, Jan. 2013, Comments, p. 13)

See also, La communication de minimis : un acte, a minima, doté d’une force obligatoire, C. VINCENT (D. 21 Feb. 2013, Études et commentaires, No 7, p. 473) ; Le non-franchissement des seuils de minimis ne vaut pas brevet de validité de l’accord, V. PIRONON (Comm, com. électr., mars 2013, n° 3, comm. 28) ;

Slight reduction in the scope of the block exemption for technology transfer agreements, P. ARHEL (JCP éd. E, No. 10-11, 7 March 2013, 194, p. 9)

La position de l’Autorité de la concurrence sur les limites au développement du commerce électronique (Avis n° 12-A-20 du 18 septembre 2012), N. KOUCHNIR-CARGILL et P. REIS (RLDA déc. 2012, 77, n° 4362, p. 31)

MasterCard Inc. et al. v. European Commission", UOMINEN judgment

European competition law and multilateral interchange fees in the market for payment cards: a critical outlook , J. D. MATHIS (European Competition Law Review, Vol. 34, Issue 3, p. 139).

Resale price maintenance (RPM) in European competition law: legal certainty versus economic theory? N. ZEVGOLIS (European Competition Law Review, Vol. 34, Issue 1, p. 25).

Collusion in experimental Bertrand duopolies with convex costs: The role of cost asymmetry. MÜLLER (International Journal of Industrial Organization, Vol. 30, Issue 6, pp. 508-517)

2.2. Distribution

La distribution sélective condamnée à la vente en ligne, C. VILMART(JCP éd. E, n° 8, 21 Feb. 2013, 1119, p. 25)

V. also, it is really forbidden to prohibit online sales to authorized distributors! M. CHAGNY (Comm, com. électr., Feb. 2013, n° 2, comm. 15) ; Distribution sélective et distribution sur internet : il est toujours interdit d’interdire, N. Pétrignet (BRDA 2/13, 31 Jan. 2013, n° 26, p. 17) Competition Authority opinion on e-commerce: much ado about little? R. CHRISTOL (RLC 2013/34, No. 2189, p. 21).

Contrat d’adhésion à une centrale d’achat, A. KHAYAT-TISSIER (JCP éd. E, n° 10-11, 7 March 2013, 1154, p. 33)

Chronicle Distribution and protection of the competitor, M. MALAURIE-VIGNAL and N. MATHEY (Contracts, conc., consum. Jan. 2012, comm. 5 to 10; Feb. 2012, comm. 28 to 36; Dec. 2012, comm. 52 to 58)

Chronique Droit de la distribution, J.-M. LELOUP (Rev. jurispr. com., n° 4, July-August 2012, p. 15)

3. Abuse of dominance

Exclusivity Contracts, Insurance and Financial Market Foreclosure, C. ARGENTON and B. WILLEMS (Journal of Industrial Economics, 60, 4, pp. 537-724)

Exclusivity contracts are sometimes justified on the basis of their ability to provide buyers with insurance against otherwise volatile prices. This may be the case, for example, in a market for the supply of electricity where a large consumer would prefer to sign a contract exclusively binding him to the incumbent monopoly rather than buy at a spot price unknown in advance. This article shows that this justification is economically unfounded since it is possible to offer price insurance contracts. Exclusivity contracts then only aim at preventing new entrants and blocking the emergence of similar but more flexible financial products because they do not bind the buyer to a producer.

Exclusivity Dealing: Investment Promotion May Facilitate Inefficient Foreclosure, C. FUMAGALLI, M. MOTTA and T. RØNDE (Journal of Industrial Economics, 60, 4, pp. 599-608).

This article explores a different facet of exclusivity contracts than the previous article by looking more closely at their justification in terms of investment. Such a contract can indeed have beneficial effects by allowing both parties to invest in their relationship. This effect is counterbalanced by the barrier to entry that the contract creates. The authors show that investment in itself prevents new entrants from entering the market: without investment, the exclusivity contract would not be necessary; by allowing it, the contract increases the value of the relationship and induces both parties to sign it. It is therefore no longer a question of opposing the positive and negative effects of exclusivity contracts, but of understanding how these two effects interact, the first engendering the second.

AstraZeneca judgment: a step too far in taking into account the effects of abuses of dominant position? , E. DIENY (JCP ed. E, No. 3, 17 Jan. 2013, 1036, p. 35)

The AstraZeneca judgment, B. BATCHELOR and M. HEALY(Competition Law Insight, Vol. 12, Issue 1, p. 9)

Selective price reduction under Article 102 TFEU ("Post Danmark" judgment) Hell Freezes Over: Climate Change for Assessing Exclusionary Conduct under Article 102 TFEU, E. ROUSSEVAM. MARQUIS(Journal of European Competition Law & Practice, Vol. 4, Issue 1, p. 32).

Les opérateurs publics face à la modernisation du droit des abus de position dominante, C. MONGOUACHON (Contrats, conc., consom. jan. 2013, n° 1, alerte 1)

Competition Authority accepts commitments from PagesJaunes SA, V. PIRONON (Comm, com. électr., Jan. 2013, No. 1, comm. 5)

Facebook, social networks and competition law, T. SCHREPEL (Contracts, conc., consum. March 2013, Alert 17)

Search Neutrality and referral dominance, D. CRANE (Journal of Competition Law & Economics, Vol. 8, Issue 3, p. 459)

The Greek lignite case, P. ANESTISetD. VALLINDAS(Competition Law Insight, Vol. 11, Issue 11, p. 11)

Behavioral antitrust and monopolization, M. E. STUCKE(Journal of Competition Law & Economics, Vol. 8, Issue 3, p. 545)

4. Restrictive practices

La relation établie entre tiers, propagation de la notion et hypertrophie de l’effet, C. MOULY-GUILLEMAUD (RLDA janv. 2013, 78, no. 4407, p. 35)

Rupture of established commercial relations: notion of brutality, N. MATHEY (JCP éd. E, n° 51-52, Dec. 20, 2012, 1785, p. 52)

Extension of the commercial relationship beyond the initial parties, N. MATHEY (JCP ed. E, No 6, 7 Feb. 2013, 1092, p. 27)

Partial termination of business relations and modification of the contract, N. MATHEY (JCP éd. E, No. 1, 3 Jan. 2012, 1004, p. 51)

Compensation for loss of customers does not result from unjust enrichment,D. MAINGUY (RLDA Feb. 2013, 79, No. 4454, p. 32)

A step towards a European law on unfair commercial practices? ,L. IDOT (Europe, March 2013, n° 3, alert 9)

5. Concentrations

The Price Effects of a Large Merger of Manufacturers: A Case Study of Maytag-Whirlpool, O.C. ASHENFELTER, D.S. HOSKEN AND M.C. WEINBERG (American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 5, 1, pp. 239-261).

This article provides an opportunity to see in practice how, based on cash outlay data, it is relatively easy to measure rigorously ex post the price increase resulting from concentration.

A Treatment Effect Method for Merger Analysis with an Application to Parking Prices in Paris, P. CHONE ET L. LINNEMER (Journal of Industrial Economics, 60, 4, pp. 631-656)

Like the previous article, this one proposes to measure the effects of a concentration ex post. To this end, it develops a general method, applicable in the very many cases where competition is spatial.

The control by the Council of State of the sanctions pronounced by the Competition Authority,M. BAZEX (D. Adm. March 2013, n° 3, p. 31)

In this article, the author comments on the Canal Plus / TPS case of the Conseil d’État ruling against the decision of the Competition Authority withdrawing the authorization given to the Canal Plus group to acquire TPS. In this case, the Authority thus pronounced a withdrawal, requested that a new notification be made under merger control and finally pronounced a substantial financial penalty. Also set out for a comprehensive understanding of this case is the priority constitutionality issue that Canal Plus had filed, arguing that the Competition Authority, in making this decision, had the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution. Finally, the author develops the question of the extent of the powers of the Council of State ruling against this type of decision: is it a judge of full litigation or of excess of power? What are the consequences in this case?

See also, Acquisition of TPS: the Conseil d’État confirms the repressive and corrective measures taken by the Adlc against Canal plus, J.-P. GUNTHER and D. TAYAR (RLDA March 2013, 80, No. 4496, p. 33); Epilogue in the Canal Plus / Vivendi case, V. PIRONON (Comm, com. électr., March 2013, No. 3, comm. 27)

Merger control: sanction for carrying out an operation before notification,J. LUCAS (JCP éd. E, n° 8, 21 Feb. 2013, Echoes of Practice, 158, p. 5)

The Electrabel case,N. KARRR. FLANAGAN(Competition Law Insight, Vol. 12, Issue 1, p. 3)

Should merger control be extended to minority shareholdings? ,F. PRUNET and G. DE MUIZON (RLC 2013/33, n° 2174, p. 82)

TEU Competition law aspects of minority shareholdings,A. TÓTH (World Competition, p. 599)

Chronique Droit des concentrations, D. BOSCO (Contrats, conc., consom. fév. 2013, n° 2, chron. 1)

Failure to notify under merger control: what good practices should be adopted? J. LUCAS (Contrats, conc., consom. mars 2013, n° 3, Etude 5)

Interoperability remedies, FRAND licensing and innovation: a review of recent case law,T. HOEHN and A. LEWIS (European Competition Law Review, Vol. 34, Issue 2, p. 101)

The single-entity theory: an antitrust time bomb for Chinese state-owned enterprises,A. H. ZHANG(Journal of Competition Law & Economics, Vol. 8, Issue 4, p. 805)

The Western Digital / Viviti and Seagate Samsung mergers reviewed in the EU and China - different priorities? ,MR. KELLERBAUERT. GONG (European Competition Law Review, Vol. 34, Issue 3, p. 119).

Merger control in the audiovisual field,V. DAUMAS (RFDA, Jan-Feb. 2013, No 1, p. 55)

6. State aid

"Commission v. EdF", G. LO SCHIAVO (RDUE, 2/ 2012, case law, p. 343).

Land Burgenland (Austria) (T-268/08) and Republic of Austria (T-281/08) v. European Commission" judgment, L. SCHICHO (RDUE, 2/ 2012, case-law, p. 343).

The European Commission’s decision-making on state-aid for financial institutions - good regulation on the absence of good governance? M. HELLSTERN and C. HELLSTERN. KOENIG (European Competition Law Review, Vol. 34, Issue 4, p. 207).

Chronique annuelle de la jurisprudence relative aux aides d’Etat (déc. 2011 - nov. 2012) , L. AYACHE et S. GHADDAB (RMCUE, Fév. 2013, n°565, p.102)

7. Public sector and competition

The adaptation of public service in the railway sector , M. BAZEX (D. Adm. Feb. 2013, n° 2, p. 37)

The author comments on the decision of the Competition Authority on practices in the rail freight sector issued in December 2012. It notes that while ex-post control through this decision is justified, the application of a more effective ex-ante control could have prevented the implementation of the sanctioned anti-competitive practices. Furthermore, the author explains the principles that governed the determination of the sanctions. Finally, a long development is devoted to the practice now known as "predatory pricing", distinguishing it from the better known practice of predatory pricing. However, the author wonders about the relevance of the sanction imposed in this case: why an injunction and not a fine to punish a predatory pricing practice?

Public service delegations under the influence of Community law ,G. ECKERT (RJEP, No. 704, Jan. 2013, p. 3)

8. Procedures

8.1. General

The legal regime of the advisory function of the competition authority , M. BAZEX (D. Adm. Jan. 2013, n° 1, p. 25)

In view of the media coverage now devoted to the opinions of the Competition Authority, the question was put to the Conseil d’État, in the context of two appeals for abuse of power of the status of the opinions issued by this authority. In dismissing these appeals, the Conseil d’État applied its case law in this case, distinguishing between mandatory and non- mandatory circulars. Thus, the positions adopted in an advisory capacity do not constitute decisions giving rise to complaints, so that the opinions delivered cannot be the subject of an appeal for excess of power. This advisory role thus contributes to transparency and legal certainty, while having to be adapted to the case in question. In this sense, it constitutes, like regulation, a means of information and anticipation of company decisions, according to the author.

Competition law and transparency: squaring the circle? ,B. MEYRING and N. BAETEN (JDE, n° 194, Dec. 2012, Vie du droit, p. 294)

The status of party to the proceedings officially recognized to the Competition Authority before the Paris Court of Appeal, E. CLAUDEL (RTD com., 2013, p. 736).

A reinforced activity: the opinions of the Competition Authority are not prejudicial and are not subject to appeal for excess of power, E. CLAUDEL (RTD com., 2013, p. 747).

See also, De la contestation contentieuse des avis de l’Autorité de la concurrence, G. CLAMOUR (RLC 2013/34, No. 2217, p. 55).

La protection des échanges et avis juridiques dans une économie mondialisée : pour une réforme du statut des juristes d’entreprise en France , C. ROQUILLY (RLDA déc. 2012, 77, n° 4381, p. 73)

S. TEMPLE-BOYER, S. TEMPLE-BOYER (JCP éd. E, No. 3, 17 Jan. 2013, 1035, p. 31).

New procedural provisions in the field of competition ,M. COMERT and S. NASSER EL DINE-POMAR (Contracts, conc., consom., n° 3, March 2013, Study 4)

Surprise inspections by competition authorities ("Dawnraid

"): the EdF experience , M. LAIGNEAU (RJEP, Feb. 2013, n° 70, p. 3)

Competition law compliance across Europe : a multi-jurisdictional challenge , F. MANIN E.A. (European Competition Law Review, Vol 34, Issue 1, p. 6)

Antitrust Settlements: The Culture Of Consent , D. GINSBURG and J. WRIGHT (George Mason University Law and Economics Research paper series, 13-18) The ECtHR judgment in case A Menarini Diagnostics srl v Italy and its implication for private enforcement of EU competition law , M. SIRAGUSA, F. MARINI BALESTRAA. SETARI(Global Competition Litigation Review, Vol. 5, Issue 4, p. 129).

Digital evidence gathering in German cartel investigations , M. SALLER(European Competition Law Review, Vol. 34, Issue 2, p. 84).

No subsidy for EU competition fines , C. HAMPTON(Competition Law Insight, Vol. 12, Issue 1, p.1)

Interim Relief Before the EU Courts: Three Great Fundamentals - and Two Fundamentals That Need a Rethink , E. BARBIERLA SERRE(CPI Antitrust Chronicle, March 2013 (1))

International Antitrust Litigation: How to Manage Multijurisdictional Leniency Applications , T. OBERSTEINER (Journal of European Competition law and practice, Vol. 4, Issue 1)

8.2. Sanction policy - Clemency - Settlement - Undertakings - Damages actions

Les sanctions du droit de la concurrence , ROUND TABLE BY F. JENNY, J.-B. BLAISE, L. VOGEL and J. VOGEL (JCP éd. E, No. 12, 21 March 2013, 1168, p. 19 andConcurrences No. 1-2013, No. 50524, www.concurrences.com)

Le contentieux indemnitaire de la concurrence à l’épreuve du procès équitable, L. ROBERT (RLDA fév. 2013, 79, n° 4465, p. 47)

Competition authority: Bruno Lasserre pleads for collective action, O. DUFOUR (Petites affiches, 22 Jan. 2013, n° 16, p. 3)

Should we despair of litigation for compensation for anti-competitive practices? Mr CHAGNY (Communication, Electronic Commerce, No. 1, Jan. 2013, comm. 6)

Should private enforcement of competition law be strengthened? W. MOESCHEL(Global Competition Litigation Review, Vol. 6, Issue 1, p. 1).

Disclosure of leniency materials by EU competition authorities: protection in the face of civil damages claims , R. PIKE RICHMOND(Global Competition Litigation Review, Vol. 5, Issue 4, p. 136).

Disclosure of leniency materials in follow-on damages: striking "the right balance" between the interests of leniency applicants and private claimants, M. SANDERS(European Competition Law Review, Vol. 34, Issue 4, p. 174)

How should undertakings approach commitments proposal in antitrust proceedings? P. MOULLET (European Competition Law Review, Vol. 34, Issue 2, p. 86).

Competition Law Remedies in Europe: Which limits for remedial discretion? I. LIANOS(CLES Research Papers, UCL, January 2013)

Leniency programs for multimarket firms: The effect of Amnesty Plus on cartel formation, Y. LEFOUILI ET C. ROUX(International Journal of Industrial Organization, Vol. 30, Issue 6, pp. 624-640)

9. International policy

Global cartels, leniency programs and international antitrust cooperation , J.P. CHOI ET H. GERLACH(International Journal of Industrial Organization, 30, 6, pp. 528-540)

— This section of the review Concurrences selects articles and working papers on themes related to competition laws and economics, mainly, but not only, in the English and French languages. This compilation does not attempt to be exhaustive but rather a survey on themes important in the area. The survey usually covers publications over the last three months after release of the latest issue of Concurrences. Articles and working papers published on the Internet only are also welcome. Authors, editors and publishers are welcome to send their papers to aronzano@ccip.fr for review in this section.

PDF Version

Authors

Quotation

Alain Ronzano, Bastien Thomas, Emmanuel Frot, Christelle Adjémian, Competition Journals: Jan. - March 2013, May 2013, Concurrences N° 2-2013, Art. N° 52020, pp. 226-230

Visites 2012

All reviews